0, 


PEW  RENTS 

THE  NEW  TESTAMENT. 

CAN  THEY  BE  RECONCILED 

7 


ROBERT  C.  OGDEN 


■4^ 


Stom  t^e  &i6irari?  of 

(profeBBor  T3?tfftdm  I5^^^  (Breen 

(J^equeaf^eb  6^?  ^im  to 
t^e  feifitari?  of 

(|f)ttnceton  C^eofogicdf  ^eminarg 


BV  773.5  .04  1892 
Ogden,  Robert  C.  1836-1913. 
Pew  rents  and  the  New 
Testament 


^^.^ 


L    ^ 


%^f^ 


./ 


„  .  i 


^,  l?isi5,-><  5v(---^ 


PEW  RENTS 

AND 

The  new  Testament. 

Can   They  Be  Reconciled  '/ 


/ 

BY     . 


ROBERT   C    OGDEN. 

Introduction  by  J.  R.  Miller,  D.D. 


pLEMING      W^      J^EVELL     (^OMPANY 

PUBLISHERS 
NEW    YORK  CHICAGO 

30  Union  Square,  East.  148-150  Madison  Street. 


Copyright,  1892, 
—BY- 
FLEMING   H.    REVELL    COMPANY. 


INTRODUCTION, 


'T^HIS  address  needs  no  introduction.  It 
^  is  on  a  subject  which  is  at  the  front 
among  the  practical  questions  of  the  day  in 
Christian  work,  and  which  is  bound  to  be 
considered,  whether  those  w^ho  look  after 
church  finances  want  to  consider  it  or  not. 

A  new  conscience  concerning  the  use  of 
money  is  making  its  voice  heard  among 
thoughtful  Christian  men.  There  is  also  a 
manifest  awakening  on  the  subject  of  the  re- 
lation and  responsibility  of  the  Church  to  the 
non-church -going  and,  in  many  cases,  prac- 
tically unchurched  masses.  First,  Christian 
people  must  be  taught  to  give  according  to 
the  principles  of  the  Gospel ;  and,  second,  the 
church  doors  must  be  thrown  wide  open  to 
all  who  would  accept  the  invitation  to  hear 
the  Gospel. 

The  method  of  voluntary  giving  meets 
both  these  conditions  and  furnishes  the  only 
basis  on  which  Christian  work  can  be  carried 
on  in  the  churches,  while  at  the  same  time  it 


Unttobuctton* 


is  the  only  system  which  is  in  perfect  har- 
mony with  the  teachings  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. 

The  address  is  therefore  most  timely.  Mr. 
Ogden  takes  high  ground,  but  his  position  is 
unassailable.  He  is  not  a  mere  theorist ;  he 
works  from  the  simple  teachings  of  Jesus 
Christ  and  the  apostles,  and  at  the  same  time 
advocates  a  method  which  has  already  been 
tried  and  proved. 

It  may  require  courage  and  a  venture  of 
faith  in  ministers  and  churches  to  break 
away  from  a  traditional  system  with  its 
grooves  all  cut  and  to  accept  a  new  one 
without  the  prestige  of  popularity,  but  if  the 
new  is  the  Christian  way  it  ought  to  be  ac- 
cepted regardless  of  immediate  results ;  and 
there  is  no  doubt  that  if  Christ  be  in  it,  its 
results  will  prove  satisfactory. 

My  friend  Mr.  Ogden  needs  no  introduc- 
tion— only  this  word  of  hearty  cheer,  from 
his  fellow-worker, 


J.  R,  Miller. 


AA^  ADDRESS  DELIVERED   BEFORE 

THE   PRESBYTERIAN   SOCIAL    UNION  OF 

PHI  LA  DELPHI  A . 


Because  I  believe  that  all  to  whom  I  speak  are 

SEEKING  truth  IN  RESPECT  OF  THE  RIGHT  METHOD  OF 
CHURCH  SUPPORT,  I  WILLINGLY  COMPLY  WITH  THE  REQUEST 
TO  PRESENT  SOME  VIEWS  IN  BEHALF  OF  THE  VOLUNTARY 
SYSTEM. 

THE  PRESENT  INTEREST  ARISES  FROM  ANXIOUS  AND  HON- 
EST   INQUIRY.      CONCLUSIONS    SHOULD     REST     ON  PRINCIPLE, 

not  expediency.  expediency  is  in  the  saddle.  the 
tendency  of  the  period  is  to  adjust  the  methods  of 
Christianity   to  the    apparently    practical.    Christ 

NEVER  surrendered   AN  IDEAL.    " 


PEW  RENTS  AND  THE  NEW 
TESTAMENT. 


nPHE  relation  of  Christian  progress  to  the 
^  numbers  of  people  and  the  material 
growth  of  the  nation  arouses  anxious  solici- 
tude upon  the  part  of  serious  men.  Study  of 
social  conditions  from  the  Christian  point  of 
view  does  not  give  reassuring  results. 

The  query  forces  itself  and  will  not  down 
at  our  bidding :  Are  we  following  cunningly- 
devised  fables?  I  presume  every  man  here 
has  met  that  question  and  answered  it  in  the 
negative.  We  are  all  satisfied  that  there  is 
no  inherent  weakness  in  the  Christian  theory 
as  given  by  Jesus  Christ  and  His  apostles. 
Plain  men  such  as  we  are  cannot  establish 
the  truth  of  Christianity  by  scholarship.  We 
assent  to  what  Christian  scholars  tell  us  of 
language,  interpretation,  criticism,  and  the 
history  of  the  sacred  canon;  but  our  faith, 
belief,  rests  upon  experience.  We  accept 
this  Christian  theory  because  it  commends  it- 
self to  our  reason ;  it  fits  humanity.  No  hu- 
man imagination  could  create  Jesus  Christ. 


pew  IRents  ant) 


Scholars  may  dispute  about  the  authorship 
of  St.  John's  gospel,  but  our  study  of  Jesus' 
last  prayer  with  His  apostles  proves  Him  di- 
vine ;  nothing  can  make  us  doubt.  The  more 
seriously  we  examine,  the  clearer  it  all  be- 
comes ;  and  so,  without  scientific  theological 
scholarship,  we  believe.  The  principles  are 
correct. 

If,  therefore,  the  Christian  theory  is  not  a 
misfit  when  applied  to  humanity,  we  must 
seek  for  the  reasons  of  present  discourage- 
ment elsewhere — that  is,  in  Christian  meth- 
ods. Methods  must  be  tried  by  principles. 
In  considering  any  mode  of  Christian  activity 
and  procedure,  we  must  ask.  What  has  Chris- 
tian experience  and  history  to  tell  of  it? 
Will  it  stand  the  judgment  of  the  Master's 
code  ? 

vSuch  a  test  is  difficult.  The  mind  clings 
to  notions  made  familiar  by  the  usages  of  a 
lifetime  or  of  generations.  We  look  at  truth 
through  surrounding  conditions.  Our  preju- 
dices are  often  mistaken  for  principles. 

A  distinguished  minister  of  our  church* 
says :  "  If  men  are  not  brought  up  to  a  level 
with  their  religion,  their  religion  they  will 
bring  down  to  a  level  with  themselves.  The 
truest,  deepest  things  in  any  system  impose 

*  Rev.  C.  H.  Parkhurst,  D.D. 


XTbe  IRew  Testament, 


a  tax  upon  us,  assert  an  expensive  imperial- 
ism over  us.  This  makes  them  irksome,  and 
we  go  quietly  about  to  devise  some  means  by 
which,  without  throwing  our  religion  over- 
board bodily,  we  can  evade  it  in  those  re- 
spects wherein  it  makes  inconvenient  de- 
mands upon  us." 

These  words,  fresh  with  the  breezes  of 
eternal  truth,  should  scatter  the  mists  of  ex- 
pediency and  compromise  that  obscure  the 
outlines  of  the  living  issue  involved  in  this 
discussion. 

GOSPEL-PREACHING    MUST    BE    FREE. 

Holding,  therefore,  that  the  right  answer  to 
this  question  is  vital  to  the  Christian  life  of 
the  individual  and  the  Church,  and  that  the 
answer  deeply  affects  important  personal  and 
associated  Christian  responsibilities,  I  will 
state  some  reasons  in  support  of  the  proposi- 
tion: 

That  the  free  preaching  of  the  Gospel  by 
means  of  voluntary  support  is  the  only  sys- 
tem that  will  meet  the  scriptural  test,  and 
therefore  it  is  preferable  to  the  pew-renting 
system. 

By  free  preaching  of  the  Gospel  I  mean 
that  the  only  condition  precedent  to  the  en- 
joyment of  the  privileges  of  a  house  of  pub- 


10  ipevv  IRents  anb 

lie  worship  is  a  willingness  to  aeeept  sueh 
privileges. 

By  voluntary  support  I  mean  conscience- 
giving  only,  pure  and  simple. 

The  absolute  need  of  the  Gospel  requires 
no  argument  in  this  presence.  Without  the 
Gospel  humanity  would  be  hopeless,  and  the 
movement  of  the  race  would  be  toward  dark- 
ness and  despair.  With  it,  in  the  simplicity 
impressed  upon  it  by  the  life  and  teaching 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  there  is  hope  and 
progress  in  all  things,  mental,  moral,  and 
spiritual. 

That  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  must  be 
free  to  all  would  seem  to  be  equally  clear. 
Some  church  methods  imply  doubt  as  to  this 
proposition.     It  therefore  requires  argument. 

The  nature  of  both  God  and  man  as  re- 
vealed in  the  Bible,  and  more  especially  in 
the  teachings  of  Jesus  Christ  and  His  apos- 
tles, would  alone  affirm  the  truth  of  this 
claim. 

The  universal  fatherhood  of  God  is  clearly 
expressed  by  Paul,  Peter,  James,  John,  and 
Jude.  It  was  taught  most  plainly  by  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  since  the  prayer  He  gave 
to  all  humanity  begins  "  Our  Father." 

The  Bible  idea  of  man  clearly  includes 
universal  brotherhood.  Solomon  asserts  that 
"the  rich  and  the  poor  meet  together  and 


Zbc  1Revv  Ucstamcnt  ii 

the  Lord  is  the  maker  of  them  all. "  Paul  de- 
clares to  the  Athenians,  who  claimed  a  supe- 
rior and  exclusive  creation,  that  "  God  had 
rhade  of  one  blood  all  nations  of  men." 
From  the  universal  fall  of  man  in  the  sin  of 
Adam  to  the  universal  offer  of  salvation  in 
the  "  whosoevers"  of  the  New  Testament,  the 
thought  of  brotherhood  is  all-pervasive. 

The  twin  facts  of  the  divine  fatherhood 
and  the  human  brotherhood  which  inhere  in 
God  as  God  and  in  man  as  man  have  a  far 
deeper  significance  in  the  light  of  the  com- 
plete revelation  in  Jesus  Christ.  The  con- 
ception of  God  as  a  loving  Father  so  clearly 
shown  in  the  parable  of  the  prodigal  son, 
and  of  all  mankind  as  brothers  so  explicitly 
taught  in  the  parable  of  the  good  Samaritan, 
hallow  and  beautify  the  mutual  relations 
which  are  inherent  in  the  nature  of  both 
God  and  man  as  moral  beings. 

The  commands  of  the  Saviour  for  the  uni- 
versal teaching  of  the  Gospel  and  the  in- 
spired instructions  of  all  the  New  Testament 
writers  are  in  harmony  with  the  natural 
rights  of  man  in  respect  of  the  knowledge  of 
God. 

Therefore  the  aggregate  result  of  all  these 
considerations,  natural  and  revealed,  is  the 
fundamental  principle  that  the  preaching  of 
the  Gospel  must  be  free. 


12  ipew  IRents  anb 

It  becomes  us,  therefore,  to  inquire  as  to 
the  means  required  by  the  divine  teaching 
for  preserving  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel 
in  its  freedom. 

Of  course  in  a  general  sense  the  plain  an- 
swer to  this  question  is.  Christians  are  the 
means.  Persons  who  embrace  the  salvation 
offered  in  the  Gospel  by  accepting  Jesus 
Christ  as  Mediator  and  Saviour  and  confess- 
ing Him  before  the  world,  enter  into  cove- 
nant with  God  and  make  a  pledge  to  human- 
ity to  live  by  the  principles  taught  in  His 
Holy  Word.  To  the  extent  of  their  ability 
and  capacity,  material,  mental,  and  spiritual, 
they  take  the  place  of  the  Christ  toward  the 
world — each  Christian  a  smaller  Christ.  By 
virtue  of  this  covenant  Christians  are  bound 
to  recognize  that  the  great  Head  of  the 
Church  did,  by  precept  and  by  practice,  enforce 
the  duty  of  institutional  work  to  preserve 
and  extend  His  Gospel.  Therefore  Chris- 
tians must  give  faithful  and  earnest  support 
to  such  organization  for  the  worship  of  God 
and  the  instruction  of  man  as  accord  com- 
pletely with  the  principles  and  methods  indi- 
cated by  Jesus  Christ  and  by  the  apostles  who 
so  well  knew  His  mind. 


Ubc  Bew  Testament.  13 


CHRIST  S    GOSPEL    INSTITUTION. 

Happily  the  gospels  give  full  information 
as  to  the  organization  that  Christ  used  for 
His  public  teaching.  It  was  the  synagogue. 
Incidentally  He  taught  on  the  hillside  and 
by  the  wayside,  using  a  boat  by  the  lake 
shore  as  a  pulpit  or  speaking  to  circles  within 
the  homes  that  made  Him  welcome;  again 
in  the  temple  as  He  had  opportunity ;  but 
the  synagogue  was  the  organization  that  He 
used  principally  and  systematically. 

Luke  records  in  a  very  general  way,  as 
indicating  His  constant  practice,  that  He 
"taught  in  the  synagogues  of  Galilee."  We 
also  read  in  Luke's  gospel  that  "  as  His  cus- 
tom was,  He  went  into  the  synagogue  of  Naza- 
reth on  the  Sabbath  day  and  stood  up  for  to 
read,"  and  that  He  followed  the  reading  with 
wonderful  instruction  concerning  the  free 
proclamation  of  His  Gospel.  Jesus  Himself 
said  to  the  high  priest,  "  I  ever  taught  in  the 
synagogue."  The  record  of  the  four  gospels 
is  full  and  complete  enough  to  establish  the 
fact  that  Jesus  used  the  synagogue  as  the 
proper  organism  for  religious  worship  and 
instruction.  The  apostles,  evangelists,  and 
their  converts  followed  His  example  so  uni- 
versally as  to  indicate  it  as  the  germ  from 
which  Christianity  has  developed,  in  all  its 


14  ipew  IRents  an& 

various  systems,  the  individual  church  organ- 
ization. The  various  church  governments — 
Congregational,  Episcopal,  Presbyterian — 
recognize  the  congregation  idea  as  derived 
from  the  synagogue  to  be  the  unit  of  organ- 
ization. 

The  synagogue,  existing  in  great  numbers 
at  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era,  was 
remarkably  complete  in  its  methods  of  wor- 
ship and  instruction.  Not  only  did  it  pro- 
vide the  opportunities  of  public  w^orship,  but 
its  Bible-schools  were  the  models  for  the 
modern  Sunday-school.  It  had  of  course 
other  functions  than  those  referred  to  as  ger- 
mane to  this  disctission. 

The  synagogue  congregation  was  a  volun- 
tary self-governing  organization.  It  had  no 
relation  to  the  Levitical  priesthood.  It  cre- 
ated its  own  government  by  elders,  desig- 
nated as  men  of  leisure.  It  was  supported 
upon  a  voluntary  system  of  alms,  which  the 
elders,  as  one  of  their  special  duties,  col- 
lected and  disbursed.  But  it  nowhere  ap- 
pears that  the  privileges  of  the  synagogue 
were  limited  to  such  as  contributed  to  its 
support.  The  presence  in  one  synagogue 
of  a  man  with  an  unclean  spirit  is  not  the 
only  evidence  that  undesirable  people  were 
not  excluded  by  caste.  Uncircumcised  pros- 
elyte Jews  had  the  privileges  of  the  syna- 


Ubc  Hew  Uestament^  15 

gogue,  and  there  is  other  evidence  beyond 
that  recorded  by  St.  Luke  that  heathens  and 
proselytes  of  the  gate  built  synagogues  which 
the  Jews  were  willing  to  accept. 

It  is  apparent  that  Jesus  Christ  did  indi- 
cate the  synagogue  as  the  organized  method 
by  which  His  free  Gospel  should  be  preached 
in  its  freedom.  He  claimed  that  one  of  the 
testimonies  to  His  divine  mission  was  that 
"  the  poor  have  the  Gospel  preached  unto 
them."  It  is  evident  that  as  the  synagogue 
was  His  usual  preaching-place,  He  preached 
in  them  not  only  to  the  rich,  but  to  the  poor 
as  well. 

LAW  OF  LOVE  AS  THE    SUPPORT  OF  WORSHIP. 

Apropos  to  the  historic  place  of  the  syna- 
gogue in  its  relation  to  the  simple  principles 
of  Jesus  that  reqtiire  the  free  preaching  of  the 
Gospel  in  a  free  church,  will  be  a  consider- 
ation of  the  proposition  that  the  "  worshipper 
must  support  the  worship." 

It  is,  of  course,  admitted.  The  idea  is 
clearly  taught  in  the  early  heathen  religions 
from  which  the  tithe  system  was  adopted 
into  the  Jewish  system,  from  the  elaborate 
instructions  for  tithing  given  in  the  Mosaic 
Law,  from  the  recognition  of  the  tithes  given 
by  Joseph  and  Mary  in  the  case  of  the  infant 
Jesus,  and  from  the  usage  in  the  support  of 


16  pew  IRents  anb 

the  synagogue.  But  it  appears  that  even 
the  Jews  were  prepared  for  higher  notions 
of  dut)^  as  witness  Zaccheus,  who  said,  im- 
mediately after  his  conversion  "  Behold  the 
half  of  my  goods  I  give  to  the  poor."  Al- 
ready had  the  Jewish  mind  reached  upward 
toward  something  better  than  legal  bondage. 
The  spirituality  of  psalmists  and  prophets 
had  survived  in  some  souls,  and  the  early 
dawn  appeared  of  the  higher  law  that  was 
perfected  in  the  life  and  teachings  of  Jesus 
of  Nazareth. 

In  the  spiritual  kingdom  of  God  founded 
by  Jesus  Christ  the  slavery  to  letter  and  tra- 
dition had  no  place.  The  Sermon  on  the 
Mount  was  the  emancipation  proclamation 
of  the  soul.  The  royal  edict  was  sealed  in  the 
blood  of  Calvary,  and  the  legend  of  the  seal 
was,  "  It  is  finished. "  The  Mosaic  principles 
survived,  but  bondage  to  the  letter  was  for- 
ever ended.  Burnt  offerings  and  sacrifices, 
the  Levitical  priesthood  and  the  tithes  so  in- 
timately associated  with  each  were  all  swept 
away  when  the  veil  of  the  Temple  was  rent 
in  twain.  Religion  was  lifted  to  the  far 
grander  ideal  of  the  blood  covenant  of  friend- 
ship between  the  divine  Christ  and  each 
person  who  would  love  and  serve  Him. 

Henceforward  the  principle  was  to  be,  "  If 
ye  love  me,  keep  my  commandments;"  "Ye 


Ubc  Bew  Testament  17 

are  my  friends  if  ye  do  whatsoever  I  com- 
mand you;"  "Anew  commandment  give  I 
unto  you,  that  ye  love  one  another;"  "Thou 
shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart 
and  with  all  thy  soul  and  with  all  thy  mind, 
and  thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself." 
And  at  the  last,  after  the  completed  glory  of 
the  resurrection  and  just  before  the  final 
glory  of  the  ascension,  there  was  a  testing 
command  put  upon  all  who  make  the  cove- 
nant of  friendship — it  was  to  go  and  teach 
all  nations;  and  this  command  His  imme- 
diate followers  heeded  carefully :  "  They  went 
forth  and  preached  everywhere." 

And  so  is  it  not  clear  that  the  Christian's 
covenant  is  a  personal  one,  that  his  covenant 
involves  the  adoption  of  the  Christ  ethics  to- 
ward the  w^orld,  obedience  to  the  Christ  idea 
in  all  things,  and  most  emphatically  in  re- 
spect of  the  spread  of  the  Christ  Gospel 
througkout  the  world?  Is  it  not  clear  that 
the  notion  of  the  law  of  duty  for  duty's  sake 
is  absorbed  into  the  higher  conception,  '  duty 
for  love's  sake?"  Therefore  as  incidental  to 
but  absolutely  a  part  of  the  new  covenant  of 
love,  the  Christian  pledges  himself  by  his 
very  confession  to  support  the  worship,  and 
thus  forever  disappears  the  technical  tenet, 
"the  worshipper  must  support  the  worship." 
The  tithe  principle  is  but  a  segment  of  the 


18  ipew  IRents  an^ 

chrysalis  of  legal  duty  from  which  the  Christ 
brought  forth  the  winged  spirituality  of  love. 

Therefore  by  just  as  much  as  the  Chris- 
tian fails  to  sustain  the  Christ  idea  that  the 
Gospel  preaching  must  be  free,  does  he  fail  to 
be  a  Christian.  He  therefore  fails  to  keep 
the  covenant  between  his  soul  and  his  God. 

That  such  was  the  apostles'  view  of  the 
pledge  to  support  the  Gospel  is  evident  from 
many  passages  in  the  Acts  and  the  Epistles. 
A  brief  allusion  will  suffice  to  show  that  St. 
Paul  considered  that  the  Christian  doctrine 
of  giving  must  be  voluntary  giving,  "  not 
grudgingly  nor  of  necessity. "  The  measure 
of  giving  was  prosperity.  The  spirit  of  giv- 
ing must  be  generous,  for  *'  the  Lord  loveth 
a  cheerful  giver."  All  this  finds  apt  illus- 
tration in  his  appeal  to  the  Corinthian  Church 
on  behalf  of  the  poor  saints  in  Jerusalem. 

The  Epistle  of  James  is  a  protest  against 
the  slightest  distinction  in  the  assembly  of 
Christians.  It  is  more.  It  is  a  command 
that  in  the  congregation  there  shall  be  no 
respect  of  persons. 

Attention  has  been  directed  to  the  various 
tithings  under  the  Mosaic  law  and  to  "  the 
generous  offerings  of  the  early  Christian 
Church,"  as  showing  the  duty  of  the  worship- 
per to  support  the  worship.  I  think  this  an 
erroneous  association  of  ideas,  which  should 


Ubc  IRew  Uestament*  19 


be  carefully  separated.  The  tithe  was  a  tax, 
and  it  may  be  cited  in  justification  of  the  duty 
of  "  the  worshipper  to  support  the  worship;  " 
nevertheless  it  cannot  be  made  to  justify 
the  pew-rent  system.  The  tithe  did  support 
the  worship,  but  it  did  not  secure  a  proprie- 
tary legal  right  to  any  particular,  exclusive 
private  portion  of  the  temple  for  the  use  of 
the  tithe-payer. 

But  the  generous  offerings  of  the  early 
Christian  Church  were  quite  different ;  they 
were  entirely  of  the  free  will.  Their  volun- 
tary character  was  proof  that  the  donors  rec- 
ognized no  tax.  The  contributions  were  a 
joyful  fulfilment  of  the  pledge  of  their  con- 
fession in  which  they  said,  "  we  will  support 
the  worship. "  Such  gifts  are  privileges.  To 
describe  them  as  the  "  taxation"  by  which 
duty  is  performed  is  to  mistake  their  char- 
acter. 

It  is  well  to  remember  that  tithes  are  men- 
tioned in  only  two  chapters  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament— in  Zaccheus'  description  of  himself 
and  in  the  ninth  of  Hebrews.  The  purpose 
of  the  latter  was  to  prove  that  "  the  law  made 
nothing  perfect,  but  the  bringing  in  of  a 
better  hope  did,  by  which  we  draw  nigh 
unto  God."  And  we  should  further  notice 
that  the  New  Testament  has  absolutely  no 
references   to    taxes  or   taxation,   except    in 


20  ipew  IRents  anb 

a  merely  descriptive  and  historical  sense. 
Even  such  allusions  are  very  few,  very  brief, 
and  purely  incidental. 

Assuming  the  correctness  of  the  reason- 
ing- presented  in  support  of  the  propositions 
that  Christ  and  His  apostles  taught  the  free 
preaching  of  the  Gospel  by  means  of  volun- 
tary support — conscience  contributions — let 
us  examine  a  little  into  the  application  made 
by  the  early  Church  of  these  teachings. 

FREE    PREACHING    A    DIVINE    COxMMAND. 

The  frequency  with  which  Jesus  freely 
proclaimed  a  free  Gospel  indicates  that  there 
were  Pharisaic  Jews  who  sought  chief  seats 
in  the  synagogues.  To  rebuke  this  spirit 
and  to  establish  the  new  dispensation  upon  a 
perfect  basis  of  human  equality  He  often  re- 
peated the  proclamation  of  Gospel  freedom. 
Six  times  the  evangelists  record  his  words, 
"He  that  hath  ears  to  hear,  let  him  hear." 
It  is  not  fanciful  to  apply  the  "  let  him  hear" 
not  only  to  the  individual,  but  to  such  of  his 
fellow-men  as  might  be  indisposed  to  "  let 
him  hear."  The  enforced  guests  from  the 
hedges  and  highways,  the  call  to  repentance 
of  men  everywhere,  the  preaching  to  all  the 
world  and  every  creature — these  show  clearly 
what  is  the  Christ  idea  of  the  conditions  upon 
which   the  right   to  hear  the    Gospel    rests 


Ube  1Rew  Uestament.  21 

— compulsory  freedom — more  than  free,  if 
possible.  Such  was  the  seed  thought,  the  di- 
vine germ,  which  was  to  bring  forth  fruit  an 
hundredfold. 

The  early  Church  responded  quickly  to 
these  conditions,  and  the  apostles,  doubtless, 
often  recalling  the  incident  of  Jesus  and  the 
woman  of  Samaria  at  Jacob's  well,  offered 
salvation  through  Christ  to  the  Roman,  the 
Greek,  the  Scythian  as  freely  as  to  the  Jew. 
A  distinguished  writer  refers  to  the  preach- 
ing of  this  Gospel  alike  to  "philosophers, 
laborers,  rulers,  soldiers,  and  heathen  slaves" 
in  audiences  that  recognize  "no  distinction 
of  classes,  but  senator  and  slave  sit  side  by 
side  in  its  assemblies.  It  lifts  the  humble 
without  degrading  the  high.  It  acknowl- 
edges no  limitations  to  race ;  but  as  soon  as 
the  minds  of  its  earliest  disciples  have  been 
enlightened  it  is  by  them  proclaimed  without 
pause  to  all  who  will  hear  it,  whether  in  Asia, 
Africa,  or  Europe."  *  Such  is  the  testimony 
of  a  great  Christian  scholar  to  the  spirit  with 
which  the  early  Church  entered  upon  the 
mission  of  the  Master. 

By  this  threefold  standard  evolved  from  the 
nature  of  moral  beings  divine  and  human, 
from  the  teachings  of  Jesus,  from  the  history 

*Rev.  R.  S.  Storrs.  D.D. 


22  pew  IRents  anb 

of  the  early  Church,  must  the  pew-rent  sys- 
tem, all-controlling  wherever  it  exists,  be 
tried.  If  it  can  stand  the  test,  well ;  if  not, 
let  it  be  anathema. 

I  hold  that  it  cannot  stand  the  test ;  that  it 
contradicts  and  subverts  the  spirit  of  the  Gos- 
pel ;  that  it  is  opposed  to  the  idea  that  the 
Gospel  must  be  freely  preached;  that  it  has 
worked  incalculable  harm  to  persons ;  that  it 
has  introduced  false  standards  of  church  asso- 
ciation and  ministerial  success;  and  that  it 
has  largely  perverted  the  Church  in  this 
country  from  its  plain  and  simple  work  of 
serving  humanity. 

CHARITY    THE     SPIRIT    OF    REFORM. 

But  in  an  effort  to  make  good  these  some- 
what strong  and  positive  statements  I  must 
be  relieved  of  the  suspicion  of  personal  con- 
demnation of  an)^  who  may  dissent  from  my 
views,  nor  must  it  be  supposed  that  I  ques- 
tion the  sincerity  of  any  church  and  minister 
practising  the  pew-rent  system.  The  sys- 
tem is  an  inheritance,  and  no  legacy  is  so 
bad  as  other  people's  mistakes,  except  only 
other  people's  quarrels.  The  custom  of  gen- 
erations has  crystallized  it.  Its  promoters 
were  little  aware  that  they  were  bequeathing 
to  their  successors   a   fungus  system  which 


Ube  IRew  ITestament*  23 

found  friendly  soil  and  congenial  atmosphere 
in  the  artificial  social  life  which  a  sudden  ac- 
cess of  wealth  has  created  out  of  the  mar- 
vellous material  development  of  our  country. 
Such  an  evil  as  I  hold  this  pew-rent  system 
to  be,  upheld  as  it  is  by  the  usages  of  more 
than  two  centuries,  is  not  to  be  cured  by  de- 
nunciation .  Rather  accord  what  the  question 
of  its  propriety  is  receiving  here  —  honest, 
earnest,  kindly,  and  intelligent  discussion — in 
order  that  we  may  come  at  last  to  the  light 
concerning  it. 

PEW  RENTS  A  LEGACY  OF  ERROR. 

Historical  data  concerning  the  pew  system 
exist,  but  are  not  readily  accessible.  We 
know,  however,  that  seats  in  churches  were 
originally  provided  for  the  aged  and  infirm 
and  for  persons  of  rank.  There  is  a  record, 
doubtless  the  result  of  some  definite  case, 
bearing  date  of  1617,  that  it  was  an  offence 
for  a  young  lady  to  sit  with  her  mothei\ 
There  was  perhaps  no  thought  beyond  that 
of  easy  collection  of  revenue  in  the  pew  tax 
of  our  colonial  period,  but  it  quickly  made 
a  proscription.  The  poor,  relegated  to  gal- 
leries or  free  seats,  were  thus  marked  in  the 
audience  with  the  sad  badge  of  poverty. 
How  serious  the  strain  upon  the   heavenly 


24  pew  IRents  anb 

grace  in  the  case  of  poor  saints,  perhaps  the 
choicest  ungathered  clusters  from  living 
branches  of  the  true  vine!  How  hopeless 
the  influence  upon  others  whose  poverty  of 
pocket  was  the  fitting  reflection  of  starving 
souls ! 

And  so  it  has  gone  on  to  its  logical  com- 
pleteness. The  metropolitan  centres  show 
many  examples  of  the  full  flower  of  the  sys- 
tem in  churches  consecrated  to  God  but  de- 
voted to  human  pride.  There  are  churches 
that  seem  to  have  been  especially  contrived 
for  the  very  large  class  seeking  social  pre- 
cedence, and  who  are  willing  to  buy  at  any 
price — and  often  the  bigger  the  price  the 
better — a  conspicuous  place  in  a  conspicuous 
church  simply  and  only  for  the  social  dis- 
tinction it  confers.  Religion  is  too  often 
the  slave  of  Fashion.  The  pew  system  fur- 
nishes the  fetters. 

It  is  needless  to  pursue  this  line  of  dis- 
cussion farther,  and  I  will  therefore  briefly 
notice  such  considerations  in  favor  of  pew 
rentals  as  I  have  not  already  touched  upon. 

It  is  also  said  that  pew  rentals  give  oppor- 
tunity for  a  gradation  of  payments  according 
to  ability.  The  reply  is  they  do  not ;  for  an 
arbitrary  bargain  is  made  that  ignores  in  re- 
spect of  Gospel  support  the  principle  "as 
God  has  prospered, "  and  nobody  but  God  who 


Ube  1Rew  XTestament.  25 


has  prospered  and  the  recipient  who  has 
been  prospered  knows  the  prosperity.  Yes, 
according-  to  means  let  there  be  a  gradation 
of  payments,  but  leave  the  question  of  ability 
to  give  where  the  inspired  apostle  left  it — 
between  God  and  the  individual  conscience. 
"  As  a  man  purposeth  in  his  heart,  so  let  him 
give"  is  the  command.  It  is  dangerous  to 
substitute  any  other  principle  in  any  duty  in- 
volving giving. 

The  right  to  exact  payment  of  the  temple 
tax  is  given  as  an  argument  for  the  pew- 
rent  system.  The  right  was  clearly  ad- 
mitted by  Christ  in  the  miracle  of  the  fish 
and  coin,  but  we  must  remember  this  was  be- 
fore the  completion  of  the  Old  Dispensation. 
Whei?e  were  those  right  safter  the  Crucifixion 
and  Calvary?  The  temple  in  this  respect  at 
least  was  not  in  the  Saviour's  thought  of 
organization  for  His  Church.  All  the  or- 
ganization, then,  that  we  have  clusters  about 
synagogue,  ecclesia,  congregation ;  and  the  in- 
spiration for  their  support  is  not  tax  or  tithes, 
but  love  as  the  fulfilling  of  the  law. 

The  higher  law  involved  in  the  voluntary 
support  of  worship  bears  on  all  alike  and 
makes  the  obligation  absolutely  universal. 
The  entire  congregation  can  be  made  to  feel 
it  equally  when  faithfully  instructed  in  the 
duties   implied   in  Christianity.     The   pew- 


26  pew  IRents  anb 

rental  system  is  necessarily  discriminating, 
partial,  incomplete,  and  not  universal.  Con- 
cerning- the  supplementary  offerings,  I  can 
say  only  that  the  theory  of  them  is  inadmis- 
sible ;  for  does  not  the  covenant  of  church 
membership  expressly  carry  with  it  a  com- 
plete consecration  not  only  of  person,  but  of 
property? 

Regarding  the  several  grounds  of  expedi- 
ency which  are  urged  in  behalf  of  pew  rentals, 
I  would  maintain: 

That  the  unity  of  family  worship  can  be 
equally  well  sustained  by  the  voluntary  as 
by  the  rental  plan.  Also,  the  sentiment  of 
association  may  be  pushed  too  far  both  in 
respect  of  the  pew  and  the  church  edifice. 
Who  of  experience  among  us  cannot  recall 
numerous  instances  in  w^hich  the  beautiful 
sentiments  of  association  have  developed 
into  inconsiderate  selfishness?  This  in  turn 
has  often  been  translated  into  a  worship  of 
boards  and  bricks  and  stones  that  kept  the 
Lord's  capital  only  too  safely  invested  in 
properties  no  longer  useful. 

Two  other  points  of  desirability  claimed 
for  the  pew-rental  system  should  be  consid- 
ered together,  namely :  that  by  it  the  personal 
interest  in  the  sanctuary  is  deepened  and 
the  attendance  upon  the  services  increased. 
The  personal  interest,  I  claim,  is  Justin  pro- 


Zbc  IKlew  Testament*  27 

portion  to  the  investment  of  both  money  and 
personal  service,  and  it  certainly  follows  that 
the  interest  developed  by  voluntary  sacrifice 
of  money,  time,  sympathy,  and  service  will 
vastly  outw^eigh  that  created  by  a  mere 
financial  contract.  The  general  experience 
also  is  that,  given  the  right  conditions  of  min- 
ister and  people,  the  attendance  upon  public 
worship  is  increased  by  the  free-pew  system. 
European  experience  in  free  public  sanctu- 
aries is  cited  against  free  pews,  but  my  own 
observation  teaches  otherwise.  I  have  no- 
where heard  a  more  simple  Gospel  nor  en- 
joyed more  genuine  privileges  of  worship 
than  in  the  great  popular  congregations  of 
the  English  cathedrals.  The  evangelical 
churches  in  Switzerland  give  beautiful  illus- 
tration of  the  meeting  on  common  ground  in 
free  seats  of  all  sorts  and  conditions  of  men: 
Families  sit  together  by  coming  early  to 
service,  and  equality  in  the  house  of  God 
is  recognized  by  the  universal  simplicity  of 
the  women's  dress,  which  challenges  the 
stranger  to  distinguish  by  any  outward  token 
of  garb  which  are  peasants,  factory  hands, 
or  the  wives  and  daughters  of  the  wealthiest 
families.  Swiss  Protestantism  has  lessons 
for  America.  One  of  the  most  highly  re- 
spected ecclesiastical  authorities  states  con- 
cerning the  pew  system  in  England,  where 


28  pew  IRents  anb 

it  has  been  known  for  many  generations  and 
where  some  of  its  worst  abuses  have  ripened 
to  maturity,  that  "  to-day,  in  the  Church  of 
England,  it  is  as  verily  a  decaying  and  van- 
ishing usage  as  is  the  use  of  the  whipping- 
post or  the  imprisonment  of  men  for  debt. " 
It  is  also  asserted  that  in  England,  and  "  es- 
pecially in  the  Church  of  England  itself, 
there  has  been  a  marked — in  many  cases  a 
vast — increase  in  the  number  of  the  public 
services  and  in  the  numbers  of  those  who 
are  in  attendance  upon  them.  And  it  is 
equally  idle  to  deny  that  that  increase  has 
been  synchronous  with  the  growth  of  free 
churches. "  *  This  is  the  testimony  that  comes 
to  me  concerning  the  free  worship  of  Europe. 
Certainly  I  would  be  the  last  to  advocate 
state  religion ;  but  there  is  one  thing  sure, 
and  it  is  that  while  state  churches  may  cre- 
ate an  aristocracy  of  priests,  they  certainly 
create  a  democracy  of  people  in  worship. 
St.  Paul's  Cathedral  and  Westminster  Abbey, 
the  Court  Church  in  Dresden  and  the  Cathe- 
dral in  Cologne,  all  prove  the  democracy 
in  worship,  and  possibly  neither  would  es- 
tablish the  aristocracy  of  priests. 

To  the  claim  that  the  pew-rent  system  gives 
opportunity  to  do  good  through  the  abundant 

*  Right  Rev.  H.  C.  Potter,  D.D. 


Zbc  IRevv  Testament*  29 

exercise  of  Christian  hospitality,  pews  becom- 
ing- a  means  of  grace  to  their  possessors,  when 
sharing  their  privilege  with  others,  I  give 
most  cordial  assent.  By  all  means  let  us 
have  with  the  pew  system  the  graces  of 
Christian  hospitality  and  courtesy.  I  yield  to 
none  in  gratitude  that  there  are  many  Chris- 
tian pew-holders  who  conscientiously  prac- 
tise these  graces.  But  to  quote  this  hospi- 
tality is  to  condemn  the  ethics  of  the  whole 
plan.  The  kindly  card  of  invitation  to  a 
particular  pew  is  a  courtesy  which  denies 
my  right  to  hear  the  Gospel  in  the  church 
that  contains  that  pew  unless  it  has  charity 
seats  at  my  disposal.  The  invitation  is  on 
a  par  with  the  courtesy  a  manager  may  give 
me  to  a  reserved  seat  in  a  place  of  amusement. 
The  preaching  of  the  Gospel  by  Christ's 
terms  is  free,  and  the  Christian's  covenant 
is  a  pledge  to  keep  it  free ;  but  the  rented 
pew  is  a  barrier  which  takes  away  the  right 
to  share  in  the  worship  and  listen  to  the  Gos- 
pel, though  haply  it  may  be  heard  by  cour- 
tesy or  charity.  The  social  equal  may  get 
the  courtesy,  the  social  inferior  the  charity. 

It  often  happens  that  the  courtesy  is  least 
where  the  attendance  is  greatest.  Large 
popularity  of  church  and  preacher  is  unlikely 
to  develop  hospitality  of  people. 

It  must,  however,  be  freely  admitted  that 


30  pew  IRents  an^ 

in  many  pew-rent  churches  hospitality  is 
shown  to  strangers.  That  does  not  at  all 
reach  the  root  of  the  matter.  It  involves  the 
question,  "  On  what  terms  is  a  worshipper  to 
be  admitted  to  God's  house?  Is  he  to  be  ad- 
mitted there  upon  sufferance  as  the  toler- 
ated guest  of  some  other  fellow-being  who 
owns  in  that  holy  place  an  exclusive  right  to 
the  occupancy  of  so  many  square  feet,  or  as 
a  fellow-citizen  of  the  household  of  God,  in 
that  Divine  Republic  in  which  there  is  nei- 
ther Jew  nor  Greek,  bond  nor  free,  but  where 
men  are  all  one  in  Christ?"  * 

And  were  there  nothing  beyond  the  treat- 
ment now  accorded  to  such  strangers  as  com- 
monly seek  to  attend  public  worship  as  guests, 
this  discussion  as  a  practical  matter  would 
be  idle.  But  from  an  ethical  standpoint  it 
would  in  any  case  be  important. 

PERTINENT  QUESTIONS. 

What  is  to  be  the  outcome  of  the  prevail- 
ing pew-rent  method?  Has  it  any  influence 
in  deciding  whether  this  generation  is  to 
hand  over  the  Church  to  its  successors  im- 
proved or  degraded?  Are  pew  rents  one  of 
the  forces  that  increase  the  growing  class  of 

*  Right  Rev.  H.  C.  Potter,  D.D. 


XTbe  IRew  Uestament  3i 

unchurched  Christians?  Are  pew  rents  a 
help  or  a  hindrance  in  the  work  of  reaching 
the  worldly  millions — the  degraded  classes 
at  both  the  top  and  the  bottom  of  society 
and  all  the  gradations  of  humanit}^  between? 
Have  pew  rents  anything  to  do  with  the  ten- 
dency to  create  a  wall  of  moral  separation 
between  classes  in  the  church  and  between 
the  church  and  the  world? 

These  are  not  idle  questions.  At  each  new 
angle  of  this  discussion  some  fresh  issue 
challenges  attention.  Shall  the  world  have 
the  free  preaching  of  the  Gospel  as  a  courtesy, 
a  charity,  or  a  right?  Pledged  Christians 
must  answer. 

Then,  too,  it  is  reasonably  claimed  that  free 
seats  encourage  the  human  weakness  that 
seeks  to  get  church  privileges  without  cost, 
and  that  the  pew-rental  system  corrects  the 
evil.  But  is  it  a  correction  that  corrects  in 
the  Christ  spirit?  Can  any  one  prove  that 
the  buying  of  a  place  in  the  house  of  God 
ever  made  a  mean  soul  great  or  liberal?  The 
proposed  remedy  is  worse  than  the  disease. 
I  can  imagine  no  surer  cure  for  sinful  selfish- 
ness than  the  faithful  preaching  of  a  Gospel 
that  shall  keep  the  stingy  soul  face  to  face 
with  duty  as  commanded  by  God,  and  no 
compromising  board  of  trustees  to  intervene, 
as  the  assignees  of  God's  claim,  to  settle  with 


32  pew  IRents  an^ 

meanness  by  accepting  a  per  cent. — five,  ten, 
or  fifty — upon  a  debt  which  should  be  paid, 
principal  and  interest,  to  the  uttermost  cent. 

But  it  is  asked,  in  view  of  the  pew  rentals, 
"  Is  not  salvation  free?"  The  reply  is,  "  Yes, 
as  water  is  free.  Water  is  free  to  consumers, 
but  the  cost  of  delivery  is  not  free,  as  wit- 
ness the  just  taxes  for  water-mains  and  other 
expensive  devices  for  its  delivery."*  But 
the  simile  stops  short.  Yes,  salvation  is  free, 
free  as  water  to  suffering,  thirsty  men.  Com- 
mon humanity  demands  that  all  men  pos- 
sessing water  shall  not  only  furnish  but  de- 
liver it  to  men  who  are,  consciously  or  un- 
consciously, dying,  of  thirst. 

Salvation  must  be  free  and  the  preaching 
of  it  free — free  as  the  air  which  none  may 
limit,  free  as  the  charity  of  Almighty  God, 
who  giveth  to  all  men  liberally  and  upbraid- 
eth  not. 

Time  forbids  detailed  objections  to  the 
pew-rent  system  drawn  from  illustrative 
existing  facts,  such  as  instances  of  great 
preachers,  renowned  for  piety,  learning, 
and  eloquence,  who  speak  to  sparse  audi- 
ences in  their  own  eminently  proper  pew- 
rent  churches,  and  yet  command  crowds 
when     preaching     in    public     halls     or     in 

*Rev.   H.  C.McCook,  D.D. 


xrF3C  IRew  UcetamcnU  33 

churches  of  other  cities.  Of  churches  in 
which  every  seat  is  rented  and  annual  auc- 
tions are  held  at  which  the  choice  is  bid  off 
at  a  premium.  Of  churches  in  which  fash- 
ion and  music  combine  to  create  popularity, 
and  in  which  strangers  are  notified,  by  man- 
ner or  word,  that  the  privileges  of  art,  social 
affinity,  and  the  incident  of  Gospel-preach- 
ing are  reserved  for  such  as  pay  for  them. 
Of  great-souled  preachers  whose  careers, 
marked  for  large  success,  are  stunted,  and 
whose  work  is  dwarfed  by  the  pew-rent  lim- 
itations until  failure  more  or  less  complete 
ensues.  Of  locked  pews,  no  longer  popular, 
which  it  is  illogical  to  condemn,  for  the 
right  to  own  or  hire  includes  the  right  to 
lock. 

A  great  catalogue  of  points  of  condemna- 
tion of  the  pew-rent  system  awaits  a  repeti- 
tion which  I  will  not  make. 

CONSCIENCE  THE   CHRIST  CASHIER. 

And  now  leaving  the  Social  Demon,  so 
powerful  in  Lhe  Protestant  Churches  of  Amer- 
ica, to  a  little  repose  in  his  stronghold,  Social 
Caste^  a  fortification  founded  on  pew  rents,  I 
ask  attention,  in  conclusion,  to  the  voluntary 
system. 

If  the  nature   of  God  and  man,  the  teach- 


34  pew  IRents  anb 

ings  and  practice  of  Jesus  and  His  apostles, 
and  the  precedent  of  the  early  Church  have 
been  truly  stated,  the  commands  that  the 
preaching  of  the  Gospel  shall  be  maintained 
free  in  proper  houses  of  worship,  with  proper 
organization,  and  that  the  maintenance  shall 
be  by  voluntary  gifts  alone,  are  impera- 
tive. 

Admit  the  facts,  and  these  twin  principles 
must  control  in  every  individual  church  or- 
ganization. They  are  as  binding  as  the  Ten 
Commandments. 

But  a  great  chorus  of  objections  is  welling 
up  from  many  minds.  It  will  be  immedi- 
ately said  that  voluntary  church  support  is 
not  practical — it  will  not  Vv^ork.  That  is  not 
in  the  case.  If  the  principle  is  right  it  must 
work.  For  special  purposes  it  might  be 
handy  to  abolish  the  command  "  Thou  shalt 
not  steal. "  But  it  exists  and  is  binding — it 
must  work  and  it  does. 

Again,  we  will  be  told  that  it  has  been 
tried  and  it  has  failed.  I  do  not  admit  it. 
Facts  drawn  from  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  in  this  country  show  wonderful  prog- 
ress in  the  extension  of  the  free-church  sys- 
tem. For  notable  instances  examine  St. 
Ann's  on  the  Heights,  Brooklyn,  or  St. 
George's,  New  York.  Experience  in  favor 
of  free  churches  grows  rapidly  in  Great  Brit- 


Zhc  1Flew  Testament.  35 

ain.  Some  of  our  churches  in  Philadelphia 
give  testimony  to  the  same  effect. 

Conspicuous  failures  there  have  been.  I 
regret  that  time  forbids  a  reference  to  de- 
tails within  my  personal  knowledge.  It  is 
nearly  twenty  years  since  a  very  prominent 
preacher  *  put  the  question  of  this  evening  as 
a  burden  on  my  mind.  Observation  of  unsuc- 
cessful experiments  with  so-called  free  pews 
has  influenced  me  decidedly  in  the  conclusion 
that  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  must  be 
free.  The  difficulty  in  these  cases  was  that 
the  voluntary  system  was  not  voluntary. 
Pledges  were  expected.  Shall  I  say  exacted? 
And  a  pledge  is  one  or  more  degrees  better 
than  a  pew  rent  according  to  the  way  in 
which  it  is  secured.  //  also  violates  the 
Christian  covenant  and  substitutes  a  human 
for  a  divine  obligation. 

Of  all  the  churches  practising  the  volun- 
tary system  I  know  of  only  one  that  accepts 
it  in  simple  completeness.  All  others  of 
which  I  have  knowledge,  and  several  that  are 
progressing  successfully  toward  the  right, 
have  some  sort  of  pledge. 

In  some  of  them  the  relation  between  a 
lifting  spiritual  life  in  the  congregation  and 
the  method  of  Gospel  support  is  clear.     But 

*Rev.  T.  De  Witt  Talmage,  D.D. 


3G  pew  IRents  ant) 

they  have  not  yet  attained  to  the  best.  The 
true  standard  is  found  only  in  the  Christian's 
confession  and  the  obligation  to  stipport  the 
free  preaching  of  the  Gospel  thereby  volun- 
tarily assumed.  Maintain  that  standard  by 
keeping  the  person  face  to  face  with  duty. 
Then  trust  him. 

Ask  a  man  to  put  a  white  ribbon  on  his 
coat  to  show  his  Christian  temperance  and 
you  discount  his  Christianity.  Ask  a  man 
for  pew  rent  or  pledge  to  support  the  Gospel, 
you  doubt  his  Christian  profession.  In  the 
one  case  the  temperance  (in  respect  to  the  use 
of  liquors),  and  in  the  other  case  the  pew 
rent,  is  made  to  stand  for  Christianity.  Any 
doubt  thrown  upon  the  Christian  confession 
degrades  it. 

In  this  practical  age  compromise  and  ex- 
pediency have  obscured  the  ideal.  The 
grand  duty  now  before  the  Christian  world 
is  to  restore  the  ideal.  Accomplish  that,  and 
our  discussion  will  not  be  upon  tithes  and 
pew  rents.  The  question  will  be.  Are  we 
saving  men? 

The  Christian's  contract  is  with  God,  The 
man-made  machine,  trustees,  organization, 
something,  steps  in  with  a  human  improve- 
ment on  the  divine  method  and  says  we 
want  security.  The  session,  the  spiritual 
guardians  of  the  church,  receive  the  member. 


Ube  IRevv  Uestament,  37 

The  board  of  trustees,  the  secular  guardians, 
step  in,  and  want  a  money  contract  to  secure 
the  pledge  of  the  church  covenant  for  the 
rental  of  a  part  of  God's  real  estate. 

A  secular  side  of  a  church  organization  is 
an  anachronism.  That  the  place  in  which  a 
man  may  sit  in  a  church  has  any  relation  to 
the  money  he  gives  for  church  support  is  an 
incongruity.  When  human  needs  and  Chris- 
tian graces  can  be  calculated  in  coin  that 
may  come.  Not  before.  These  heresies 
should  be  abandoned  immediately  and  for- 
ever. 

The  Christian  church  is  a  family.  St. 
Paul  says  so.  In  the  Church  the  family 
ideal  should  be  recognized.  The  family  ob- 
ligation is  expensive.  The  family  instinct 
can  usually  be  trusted.  Bring  in  this  lofty 
idea  of  obligation  and  trust  the  Christian 
grace.  Then  the  working  together  of  all 
things  for  good  to  them  that  believe  will 
bountifully  appear.  Christian  graces  will 
be  multiplied  and  church  support  will  be 
vastly  enhanced. 

In  the  Holland  church  to  which  I  have 
alluded  the  contributions  for  the  support  are 
voluntary  entirely.  The  only  pledges  are 
those  made  secretly  between  the  person  and 
his  God.  The  treasurer  will  keep,  when  de- 
sired, a   record   by   numbered   envelopes   of 


38  ipevv  IRents  ant) 

contributions,  and  will  inform  the  giver  once 
a  year  the  gross  sum  given,  but  he  is  in 
honor  bound  not  to  divulge  any  contribution 
to  any  other  than  the  donor.  The  church 
expenses  are  not  large,  something  less  than 
$4,000  a  year,  but  the  contributions  are  am- 
ple. The  church  has  never  been  in  debt 
over  the  first  of  any  month,  and  no  demand 
has  ever  been  made  to  make  up  a  deficiency. 
And  I  have  a  guess,  only  a  guess,  that  should 
the  treasurer  state  the  per  cent,  of  the  largest 
recorded  contribution  to  the  sum  collected 
its  smallness  would  surprise  you.  This  to 
anticipate  the  question.  Do  not  some  one  or 
two  persons  bear  the  bulk  of  the  burden? 
No,  the  letter  and  the  spirit  are  in  perfect 
accord.  Should  the  experience  of  a  single 
young  church  be  taken  as  conclusive  on  this 
subject?  The  answer  is  no.  The  Script- 
ures should  settle ;  this  church  merely  illus- 
trates it. 

It  will  also  be  asked.  Will  the  adoption  of 
a  voluntary  system  such  as  has  been  described 
affect  the  support  of  the  ministry  imfavor- 
ably?  In  my  opinion,  no.  Reliance  upon 
the  highest  principles  of  Christianity  and 
humanity  would  be  better,  far  better,  and 
give  far  greater  money  results  than  the  pres- 
ent degenerate,  material,  compromising  ex- 
pedient. 


Zbc  IRew  Testament*  39 

Robertson  says,  in  one  of  his  lectures  on 
the  Corinthians :  "  Appeal  to  the  highest  mo- 
tives, appeal  whether  they  be  there  or  no,  for 
you  make  them  where  you  do  not  find  them. " 
"  Let  men  say  what  they  will  of  human  nat- 
ure's evil,  a  generous,  real,  unaffected  con- 
fidence never  fails  to  elicit  the  Divine  spark. " 

Can  a  better  Christianity  than  Paul's  be 
discovered?  To  him  Christianity  was  Christ. 
It  has  been  truthfully  said  that  "  Paul's  own 
Christianity  was:  a  few  facts  respecting  his 
Redeemer's  life,  a  few  of  his  master's  pre- 
cepts, like  'It  is  more  blessed  to  give  than  to 
receive, '  out  of  which  he  educed  all  Chris- 
tian principles. " 

Our  evening  will  not  have  been  wasted  if 
we  earnestly  seek  the  Divine  authority  for 
our  beliefs  on  this  question,  whatever  those 
beliefs  may  be,  and  in  this  connection  I 
would  commend  to  thoughtfiil  study  the  9th 
chapter  of  11.  Corinthians  and  the  2d  chapter 
of  James. 

For  myself,  sincerely  believing  in  the  truth 
of  the  principles  I  have  endeavored  to  state, 
I  shall  hope  to  see  them  prevail  until,  as  a 
writer  on  this  subject  has  said,  "in  the  house 
of  God  at  any  rale  the  sound  of  buying  and 
selling,  of  hiring  and  of  leasing,  shall  be  for- 
ever silenced. " 

And  thus  my  hope   is  that  it   may  come 


40  pew  IRents. 


about  in  respect  of  pew  rents  and  other  vi- 
tal matters,  that  we  may  fulfil  ourdtity  to  the 
ages  by  handing  down  our  Christian  state- 
ments, forms,  and  methods  purer  and  better 
than  we  received  them.  For  who  of  us  here 
present  desires  that  our  successors  of  the 
2oth  century  shall  say  of  us,  as  we  say  of  our 
predecessors  of  the  i8th  century,  that  we  left 
them  an  inheritance  of  mistakes? 


.€♦> 


.^V^  I^\^^/,^   -:^*^^' 


Princeton  Theological  Seminarv  Libraries       r^^i^M.^ 


jj^K     "?^    -V^^Ts^ 


F^ 


>4^      r^ 


^^     1    1012  01234  9363      f  »4  ^  -^^^ 


f: 


iS-  v?^^ 


^ajt; 


'.  ~'* 


^A   ■> 


^^'^.W-^-^'M 


m 


